MCC (Minimum competitive Concept 2015

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by IKE

Previous years are located here.

Each year I am amazed by what teams come up with to compete in FRC. Teams have a ton of wonderful ideas and some even see good execution of those ideas.

I would like this thread to focus on the "Minimum Competitive Concept" for a robot for 2015. It is often easy to identify all the possible tasks you could have a robot do. Prioritizing those tasks, and realizing it in the form of a competitive robot is in my opinion much more impressive.

If you haven't watched the Simbotics Strategy Presentation, please do before responding to this thread. Especially review the "Golden Rules 1&2".

Assumptions are that one of the primary goals of the MCC is to play in elims (not necessarily win on Einstein), and your team has mid-pack to lower fabrication resources.

Please list your assumptions, strategy to seed high, estimate of a winning score, and what robot design elements would achieve this score.

I personally usually assume for this thread that the goal is to seed high enough to be either a Alliance Captain or a pretty early pick. I would appreciate this year if we kept towards that philosophy as opposed to getting into a KOP Robot/Cheesecaking discussion. Not that it isn't a viable concept, but I think it has been covered at length elsewhere.

Minimum competitive concept for 2015 - reliable can burglar. Note I didn't say fast, I said reliable. At most events (at least in NE) this would have been a first round pick due to not wanting to deal with playing at a disadvantage with cans.[1] Now, likely this would not have resulted in playing very deep into eliminations. But, if my math is right being picked twice in the first round and making QFs would likely get you to DCMP.

What would this involve? A flow controlled cylinder and some either fiberglass rod or pvc. Oh, and the KoP drivetrain. Which, even accounting for my constant pessimism about the abilities of teams, makes this the cheapest to implement MCC I've ever come up with[2]


[1] There's a discussion to be had as to whether this was a rational decision, I'd make the argument that most teams picking can burglars first round were being irrational as the majority of alliances at district or even NE DCMP were NOT constrained by cans. BUT the fact remains that these picks were consistently made through the first 5 weeks.

[2] I don't think I did one for 2010, which would have been cheaper as I would have said "a drivetrain that doesn't involve those AM lift kits and drive practice"

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Minimum competitive concept for 2015 - reliable can burglar. Note I didn't say fast, I said reliable. At most events (at least in NE) this would have been a first round pick due to not wanting to deal with playing at a disadvantage with cans.

I know you added the qualifier about NE events but at both NC and Palmetto... those machines would have been lucky to have been picked at all. I suspect there were events elsewhere that were similar. That might have more than a little to do with the region mind you...

At any rate, I would agree that a reliable mechanism is always better than a purely fast mechanism. Combining the two is deadly.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Minimum competitive concept for 2015 - reliable can burglar. Note I didn't say fast, I said reliable. At most events (at least in NE) this would have been a first round pick due to not wanting to deal with playing at a disadvantage with cans.[1] Now, likely this would not have resulted in playing very deep into eliminations. But, if my math is right being picked twice in the first round and making QFs would likely get you to DCMP.

What would this involve? A flow controlled cylinder and some either fiberglass rod or pvc. Oh, and the KoP drivetrain. Which, even accounting for my constant pessimism about the abilities of teams, makes this the cheapest to implement MCC I've ever come up with[2]


[1] There's a discussion to be had as to whether this was a rational decision, I'd make the argument that most teams picking can burglars first round were being irrational as the majority of alliances at district or even NE DCMP were NOT constrained by cans. BUT the fact remains that these picks were consistently made through the first 5 weeks.

[2] I don't think I did one for 2010, which would have been cheaper as I would have said "a drivetrain that doesn't involve those AM lift kits and drive practice"

The slight issue with this argument is at weak events, no one would pick canburglars.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

The slight issue with this argument is at weak events, no one would pick canburglars.

That's what I'd assume too. I'd claim NE is pretty weak and yet I consistently saw can burglars going really early at our events. Why? I have no idea. As I mentioned, I feel this was an irrational decision and I have no evidence more detailed than my anecdotal experience. Maybe it was a solely NE centric bout of insanity. Or it might have had something to do with depth of events. Not really sure.

[IKE]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

The slight issue with this argument is at weak events, no one would pick canburglars.

Did you guys actually see reliable ones that did not get picked up? I am not disagreeing with that statement, but thinking back, I cannot think of any reliable ones that did not get picked up at Michigan districts. To be fair though, there was a ton less of these than I expected.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by IKE

Did you guys actually see reliable ones that did not get picked up? I am not disagreeing with that statement, but thinking back, I cannot think of any reliable ones that did not get picked up at Michigan districts. To be fair though, there was a ton less of these than I expected.

At the regional level, I saw very few (if any) robots who had reliable Canburglars, but didn't have other elimination worthy functions. Most teams that I saw who were picked for Canburgling, would have been picked otherwise for their stacking/capping abilities. As such it's hard to evaluate the claim.

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by Karthik

At the regional level, I saw very few (if any) robots who had reliable Canburglars, but didn't have other elimination worthy functions. Most teams that I saw who were picked for Canburgling, would have been picked otherwise for their stacking/capping abilities. As such it's hard to evaluate the claim.

New York Events had a few teams that were picked solely for their ability to grab cans from the step, whether that be autonomous or teleop. 4203, 174 come to mind. These were the last selections, however, at both events. All the alliances below #1 needed scoring robots for their third robot.

These robots also grabbed during teleop (which was fine for these events, no alliance was grabbing all four during autonomous, and only one or two alliances were capable of more than 4 fully capped stacks).

I also can't think of a robot at either event capable of grabbing containers from the step that was NOT selected.

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

The slight issue with this argument is at weak events, no one would pick canburglars.

Originally Posted by IKE

Did you guys actually see reliable ones that did not get picked up? I am not disagreeing with that statement, but thinking back, I cannot think of any reliable ones that did not get picked up at Michigan districts. To be fair though, there was a ton less of these than I expected.

Originally Posted by Karthik

At the regional level, I saw very few (if any) robots who had reliable Canburglars, but didn't have other elimination worthy functions. Most teams that I saw who were picked for Canburgling, would have been picked otherwise for their stacking/capping abilities. As such it's hard to evaluate the claim.

I agree that a "pure" canburglar, with no scoring capability, would have been a long shot for both first and second picks at nearly any regional. Burgling a can without the ability to right it and deliver it exactly where the alliance needs would not meet MCC criteria. That said, even most of the unreliable burglars I saw picked or got picked - for scoring ability. Also, while the materials list for a canburglar is pretty simple, the tolerances for a mechanism that reaches across three rows of totes to retrieve, release, and (preferably) orient an RC are trickier than for a passable forklift, boat lift, or even side lift. That is, anyone who can build a can burglar is going to be able to put something else useful on the robot.

[cadandcookies]

I'd say a MCC at most regionals is a kit drive train, a simple lift (using REV extrusion, 80/20, or VersaFrame), and then lots of human player and drive practice.

Gets you 40 coop points (round it to 32 on average, say you missed a couple), and somewhere from 30-40+ noodle points (with proper strategy/good partners), and if you're well practiced a few small stacks for 20 points or so.

That would rank you reasonably well at pretty much any regional outside the extremely competitive ones, and pretty much guarantee playing on Saturday afternoon in some capacity.

[MrForbes]

1726 made a robot that was able to achieve the goals you stated for a MCC robot. We knew that cans were where the points are, and decided to make a robot that could deal with cans effectively, and also deal with totes less effectively. We figured most other teams would be making stackers that would work at the chute door (yes, chute door) so we decided to make our be able to get totes from the landfill for small stacks, and be able to cap other teams' taller stacks. It worked pretty well, we were in eliminations in our regionals, although we ended being the highest ranked unpicked team in our division at Champs.

The big claw works well for grabbing cans, and can upright them with some practice. It can also grab a tote if needed. The small lower arm will lift a tote onto another, and can make a stack of two relatively easily, but a stack of 3 or 4 is pretty sketchy to move around without falling over.



Bonus points for the relatively low level of fabrication skills and materials needed? The judges at Alamo thought so. And it makes the game interesting to play, every match is different if you're the capping robot

[BrennanB]

Originally Posted by Karthik

At the regional level, I saw very few (if any) robots who had reliable Canburglars, but didn't have other elimination worthy functions. Most teams that I saw who were picked for Canburgling, would have been picked otherwise for their stacking/capping abilities. As such it's hard to evaluate the claim.

Of all the events that I followed closely, I think 1305 and 4976 are the only one to really fit the high pick number for a robot that only did cans. Third overall picks at North Bay and Windsor.

Cangrabers for a first pick are very niche like. High seeds don't want them because they can cap their own stacks, even low seeds it's a bit scary as a capper doesn't do too well with no totes to score, but you don't want to solo totes either.

We (4476) also were a "virtually" can only robot, but were selected much lower (due to less reliability seen with our team as a whole) as 6th overall pick and 7th alliance captain respectively. I feel like this would be more typical of alliances looking to go deep.

2848 was a can only robot as well and think they ended in similar positions, lower seed quarterfinalists. They were reasonably reliable at getting 1+ out of the 4.

So not sure a reliable can grab is enough.

[Monochron]

Originally Posted by IKE

Did you guys actually see reliable ones that did not get picked up? I am not disagreeing with that statement, but thinking back, I cannot think of any reliable ones that did not get picked up at Michigan districts. To be fair though, there was a ton less of these than I expected.

I would guess that Michigan districts are particularly competitive. Adam may have been referring to earlier competitions or less competitive ones.

[IKE]

Originally Posted by Monochron

I would guess that Michigan districts are particularly competitive. Adam may have been referring to earlier competitions or less competitive ones.

Actually most Michigan district events were not particularly competitive due to an influx of new teams. Most district events were about 25-30% new or 2nd year teams, and some were as high as 50% young teams (which typically are still learning how to make an effective robot). Of the 18 district events, some were pretty effective.

Now I will state that at several events can burglars brought cans over that did not end up being utilized.

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by IKE

Actually most Michigan district events were not particularly competitive due to an influx of new teams. Most district events were about 25-30% new or 2nd year teams, and some were as high as 50% young teams (which typically are still learning how to make an effective robot). Of the 18 district events, some were pretty effective.

Now I will state that at several events can burglars brought cans over that did not end up being utilized.

Originally Posted by Monochron

I would guess that Michigan districts are particularly competitive. Adam may have been referring to earlier competitions or less competitive ones.

Cans from the middle were completely unnecessary at events where the two best robots together could only make 3 stacks.

There were both regionals and districts where this was the case. This might seem crazy now, but in Week 1, if your robot could consistently make one stack, you were very good. Many people don't remember that because 148, 987, and 624 competed week 1, but Dallas wasn't the only event that week.

[tr6scott]

I think TORC is MCC...
(At least on good years)

Simple elevator, tested multiple arms, from rigid flippy dogs, but stuck with articulated air, just as it seemed to have more conisistant picks. Easier to get out of trouble too when a miss-load occurred.

Omni H drive, but needed to articulate side wheel for crossing scoring platform, which required a little more design and fab, than a MCC.

Simple reliable tape measure can burglar, that never missed, grabbed one can, and getting 4 cans up on an alliance = blue banner just about anywhere.
https://youtu.be/710_8mUA-0g

We had capability of 6 high stacks, but in the first event, 5 high was fine.

Seven different automodes but almost never used them, as 2 totes, or 2 cans or 1 bot to the auto zone was still worth the same thing, nothing. . .

Built with a week to spare, host week 0 event, and drive, drive, drive. . .

But the game all came down to consistency, and that is KISS and TORC.